Summary: We will not investigate most of Mr X’s complaint about damage caused to his vehicle by a Council vehicle because it is reasonable for him to submit a claim to the Council’s insurers and ultimately take the matter to court. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about information disclosure because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better suited. We will not investigate the Council’s complaints handling because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council:
1. damaged his vehicle during a waste collection;
2. failed to provide key evidence and information he requested; and
3. did not investigate his complaint in line with its complaints policy.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Damage to vehicle

7. We will not investigate this complaint. The role of the Ombudsman is to consider complaints of administrative fault. We cannot decide liability in complaints about damage to property, only the courts can do this. Mr X could submit a claim to the Council’s insurers. If the claim is rejected, Mr X could take the matter to court, and it is reasonable to expect Mr X to do so as it is the only way to achieve the primary outcome he seeks.

Failure to provide information

8. Mr X requested information from the Council, but he said the Council failed to provide it. Mr X can submit a Subject Access Request for any information relating to himself. He can submit a Freedom of Information request for the other information he seeks. If the Council does not provide the information, it is open to Mr X to take the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
9. Parliament created the ICO to specifically consider these types of complaint. It is therefore better suited than the Ombudsman to decide whether the Council should provide the information requested. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint because the ICO is better suited.

Complaints handling

10. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures if we decide not to investigate the substantive issue. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate most of Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to take the matters complained about to court. For the remainder, the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman